As for the CIA, I'm sure that agency has politicized by the Obama regime. At least those in charge are loyal Democrats.

Isn't it funny how to deflect heat on Trump, stuff that allegedly purports to a POS Ted Kennedy is used as defence? "He did it so its okay, so there"

And there's proof that the CIA (Including presumably career spooks of 20-30 years) are in the pocket of Obama? Jesus, that's tenuous at best to make Trump look good.

You should be worred that Trump has dismissed the CIA, not the information they're presenting. If in the future an agent discovers a plot to attack the servers of the WH, and Trump doesn't want to hear it, and decides the agent is lying, you'll be in real shit street. But its okay, Ol Don has a good brain! Lol

Isn't it funny how to deflect heat on Trump, stuff that allegedly purports to a POS Ted Kennedy is used as defence? "He did it so its okay, so there"

And there's proof that the CIA (Including presumably career spooks of 20-30 years) are in the pocket of Obama? Jesus, that's tenuous at best to make Trump look good.

You should be worred that Trump has dismissed the CIA, not the information they're presenting. If in the future an agent discovers a plot to attack the servers of the WH, and Trump doesn't want to hear it, and decides the agent is lying, you'll be in real shit street. But its okay, Ol Don has a good brain! Lol

I just won a bet with myself that you would post that guy's bio before I did. Salut.

Thanks, I'm surprised, well considering the state of affairs I guess I'm not, that nobody hasn't brought him up before, like during the Sunday Shows or in an editorial. It such an obvious retort to the people at places like the NYT that are pushing this claim of "fake news." To point out the many examples of plagarism, unethnical reporting, selective editting, giving away debate questions to certain candidates, and the outright "fake news" they themselves have committed in the past.

Yes, but its irrelevant to the current topic. Trump has dismissed the CIA's publically made assessment of any suspect hacking. If it wasn't the Russians, but a kid in India or New Zealand, and it was the FBI and not the CIA making the accusations, would it be more credible? That your next POTUS is basically pissing on the CIA and its personel should worry you greatly. He isn't capable of accepting information he doesn't like to hear.

Yes, but its irrelevant to the current topic. Trump has dismissed the CIA's publically made assessment of any suspect hacking. If it wasn't the Russians, but a kid in India or New Zealand, and it was the FBI and not the CIA making the accusations, would it be more credible? That your next POTUS is basically pissing on the CIA and its personel should worry you greatly. He isn't capable of accepting information he doesn't like to hear.

Yes, but its irrelevant to the current topic. Trump has dismissed the CIA's publically made assessment of any suspect hacking. If it wasn't the Russians, but a kid in India or New Zealand, and it was the FBI and not the CIA making the accusations, would it be more credible? That your next POTUS is basically pissing on the CIA and its personel should worry you greatly. He isn't capable of accepting information he doesn't like to hear.

Maybe it's the CIA that's been pissing on their own country for years. Kennedy wanted to smash them i to a thousand pieces. Perhaps he was onto something there.

Yes, but its irrelevant to the current topic. Trump has dismissed the CIA's publically made assessment of any suspect hacking. If it wasn't the Russians, but a kid in India or New Zealand, and it was the FBI and not the CIA making the accusations, would it be more credible? That your next POTUS is basically pissing on the CIA and its personel should worry you greatly. He isn't capable of accepting information he doesn't like to hear.

Pud, you must be thrilled to have me around to help explain this stuff to you.

The Ds and their media accomplices are doing everything they can to discredit and de-legitimize Trump.

''Fake news'', ''alt-right'', interfering with the Electoral College voters, trying to de-legitimize the Electoral College itself, waiting weeks then demanding recounts that can't be done in time for the Electoral College vote, ''he's a Nazi'', ''he's extreme'', ''he's a nut'', ''he's not qualified'', on and on (eight years ago anyone simply saying they were going to try to block the excesses of Obama's agenda were excoriated as Un-American and racists FOR YEARS afterward, but this stuff is all ok this time). Now he's in cahoots with Putin.

They did their level best to ignore and cover up Hilary's past and what she is, but they were never able to quite contain the hacked classified emails she illegally had on her home server. That just wouldn't go away no matter how much they tried to ignore and downplay it.

And now - surprise, surpise - they are trying to generate a hacking scandal to pin on Trump. Not only does it pile on with their other attempts to de-legitimize him, but down the road when anyone points to Hilary's hacking crimes, any ''Progressive'' worth their salt will then be able to counter that by bringing up the story about the Russians hacking the election for Trump. This is how these people operate.

Oh, it wasn't the Ds, it was the CIA. Oh, yes, of course. Then it must be true. Have you noticed Obama doesn't seem to have done much the past eight years? It's because the Community-Organizer-In-Chief doesn't really know anything else, and isn't interested in anything else. No foreign policy accomplishments - certainly none we can be proud of. He hasn't done a thing to improve the economy. No, his sole focus has been on Party Building. He's further politicized race relations. He's further politicized immigration, and all those new Democrat voters that come along by doing so. He's politicized law enforcement. He's politicized the military - firing dozens of our top military men and replacing them with people whose main credentials are that they share his ideology. He's further politicized the EPA, and they've churned out million of pages of obnoxious regulations. He's politicized the IRS. He's further politicized his office, by tearing down much of separation of powers and Constitutional limits on the president and on the executive branch. He's politicized the Justice Department to a new level. He's politicized our healthcare system. On and on and on and on. This is what he's been doing all this time.

Obama is the ultimate political hack. Is it really so hard to figure out he's politicized the CIA? At least the upper level over there?

Plus, it was shown by analysis of the Podesta emails that his system was hacked through a common phishing scheme that either Podesta or a staff member was stupid enough to fall for. This was widely reported during the last week of October by CBS, CNN, Fox, Salon, Business Insider and even Vox and The Smoking Gun.

It would appear the Democrats are trying to cover up their own stupidity.

New York officials probably won’t take my advice, since seizing Trump’s property might appear partisan. (Manhattanites voted against Trump by about 10 to 1.) But, according to almost every eminent-domain scholar and land-use lawyer I consulted, if the city tried my strategy, courts would probably uphold it.

The city doesn’t need to prove that Trump Tower is derelict to declare it “blighted”; the mere fact that it’s hindering traffic, impeding commerce and draining the public fisc could be sufficient. Then officials just need to find some alternate use for the property — perhaps a Hamilton memorial? — that they could reasonably believe better serves the city’s interests.

Lots of liberal elites believe our president-elect is a nuisance. In this case, though, the term has a specific legal meaning: any activity or physical condition that “obstructs, damages or inconveniences the rights of a community.” Crackhouses, brothels, foul smells and blocking of rights of way are common examples.

The best part about this “public nuisance” strategy (besides its name)? The city could condemn Trump Tower without having to pay Trump “just compensation.” It wouldn’t owe him a dime, in fact.

Hey, Trump did say the government needs to start driving harder bargains

Pud, you must be thrilled to have me around to help explain this stuff to you.

The Ds and their media accomplices are doing everything they can to discredit and de-legitimize Trump.

''Fake news'', ''alt-right'', interfering with the Electoral College voters, trying to de-legitimize the Electoral College itself, waiting weeks then demanding recounts that can't be done in time for the Electoral College vote, ''he's a Nazi'', ''he's extreme'', ''he's a nut'', ''he's not qualified'', on and on (eight years ago anyone simply saying they were going to try to block the excesses of Obama's agenda were excoriated as Un-American and racists FOR YEARS afterward, but this stuff is all ok this time). Now he's in cahoots with Putin.

They did their level best to ignore and cover up Hilary's past and what she is, but they were never able to quite contain the hacked classified emails she illegally had on her home server. That just wouldn't go away no matter how much they tried to ignore and downplay it.

And now - surprise, surpise - they are trying to generate a hacking scandal to pin on Trump. Not only does it pile on with their other attempts to de-legitimize him, but down the road when anyone points to Hilary's hacking crimes, any ''Progressive'' worth their salt will then be able to counter that by bringing up the story about the Russians hacking the election for Trump. This is how these people operate.

Oh, it wasn't the Ds, it was the CIA. Oh, yes, of course. Then it must be true. Have you noticed Obama doesn't seem to have done much the past eight years? It's because the Community-Organizer-In-Chief doesn't really know anything else, and isn't interested in anything else. No foreign policy accomplishments - certainly none we can be proud of. He hasn't done a thing to improve the economy. No, his sole focus has been on Party Building. He's further politicized race relations. He's further politicized immigration, and all those new Democrat voters that come along by doing so. He's politicized law enforcement. He's politicized the military - firing dozens of our top military men and replacing them with people whose main credentials are that they share his ideology. He's further politicized the EPA, and they've churned out million of pages of obnoxious regulations. He's politicized the IRS. He's further politicized his office, by tearing down much of separation of powers and Constitutional limits on the president and on the executive branch. He's politicized the Justice Department to a new level. He's politicized our healthcare system. On and on and on and on. This is what he's been doing all this time.

Obama is the ultimate political hack. Is it really so hard to figure out he's politicized the CIA? At least the upper level over there?

Okay, let's assume all of what you say is true. Including that career CIA agents, officials and deputy directors are either deliberately or unwittingly (because, like our MI5 and MI6 personel, they're politically naive, and dragged off the street), put the Democratic party before national security.

Where does this leave the professional relationship between Trump and the CIA and the other security agencies: not to mention allied security services, MI5, MI6, German BND and MAD, French DGSE, CSIS (Canadian), etc? If his attitude is basically to disregard or vilify the information he's given as false because he doesn't like it, then the allied agencies will be circumspect in sharing what they know. Not because of petulance (they leave that for Trump); but because it will be potentially wasted.

You've met Senda; how did you feel when, with the best intentions (and I for one have no doubt you did) you suggested he clear things from his hovel? A bit hurt? As if your opinion was worthless? Extrapolate those intentions to national security. Sure, what is alleged with the emails is the Democrats, but that of itself is irrelevant to Trump's response. He responded by incorrectly stating the CIA said there were no wmd in Iraq. They didn't. Bush's people simply cherry picked the info and disregarded the bits that didn't fit or was uncertain.

He also said Putin hadn't invaded Crimea: what is wrong with this man? He thinks what he thinks is true, and only what he thnks. He's a fucking sociopathic moron.

The overseers of the U.S. intelligence community have not embraced a CIA assessment that Russian cyber attacks were aimed at helping Republican President-elect Donald Trump win the 2016 election, three American officials said on Monday.

“It has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian government — a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States, which Trump praises at every opportunity,” Mr. Reid wrote. “The public has a right to know this information.”

Plus, it was shown by analysis of the Podesta emails that his system was hacked through a common phishing scheme that either Podesta or a staff member was stupid enough to fall for. This was widely reported during the last week of October by CBS, CNN, Fox, Salon, Business Insider and even Vox and The Smoking Gun.

It would appear the Democrats are trying to cover up their own stupidity.

While Kerry has privately complained that the acrimonious presidential campaign between Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Drumpf has made his job harder in recent months, department spokesman John Kirby denied that Kerry's travels were timed to keep him out of the country during the November 8 vote.